free-range politics, organic community

Game Over? Not Really. The Time has Come to Investigate the Perpatrators of the Russia Hoax

Submitted by Pluto's Republic on Thu, 04/18/2019 - 10:54am

This morning's press conference with Attorney General Bill Barr, as he released the redacted report of the Mueller investigation to Congress, came and went without a single surprise for any well-informed person with critical thinking skills.

If you followed the attempt of Obama Administration officials to sabotage and overturn the 2016 presidential election from its very beginning in the summer of 2016 — while using expert and professional sources of news as reported by alternative media — then you already knew that there was no collusion between this President and the Russian government. Even before the inauguration in February 2017 — based on the only available physical evidence of this event — you already knew that:

The DNC emails that were published by Wikileaks were not hacked by the Russians or anyone else.

You already knew that those emails were copied to portable media from inside the headquarters of the DNC.

You already knew that the copied emails were given to a former Britich Ambassador, who carried them to London and passed them to Wikileaks.

You already knew that there is no physical evidence of the spurious charges of hacking made against the Russian government.

You already knew that if such evidence existed, then the NSA would definitely have captured it. And, they can not produce it.

You already knew that CrowdStrike is a government contractor that destroyed the log files of the DNC server that was allegedly hacked, and has no evidence to back their fantasy misinformation about Russian hackers released to the public.

You already knew that CrowdStrike misinformation was the sole "evidence" that co-conspirators in the Intelligence Community based their Russian Election Meddling assessment on — as the disclaimer within the assessment clearly states.

You already knew that the Intelligence Community was illegally spying on the Trump campaign in summer 2016 without search warrants, and were unable to come up with any evidence of collusion with Russia.

You already knew that the Intelligence conspirators then used myriad falsified evidence — partly paid for by the DNC — to obtain a FISA search warrant in late September 2016 to cover their crimes in the event that Clinton lost.

You already knew that the Poisoned Tree where all subsequent evidence and allegations would come from, is still in place right now. Waiting to be exposed.

So, it will come as no surprise to you that two years of aggressive and expensive investigation into this matter has resulted in the fact that:

President Donald Trump did NOT collude with Russia. No American colluded with Russia, including Roger Stone.

President Trump did not obstruct justice in this investigation. In fact, according to the Department of Justice, he was more transparent and cooperative than any President before him undergoing similar investigations. Furthermore, President Trump and his legal team requested that today's report be sent to Congress without any retractions from the White House.

So, what comes next? Congress will immediately put on a months-long ShitShow, as only they can do. It will be a desperate and embarrassing waste of time and it will amount to absolutely nothing whatsoever. I'll skip the details, the highlights, and the ultimate failures because you already know what that looks like.

But this is by no means over. Not even for a minute.

It is time to investigate and prosecute those members of the Federal government who foisted this HOAX on the American People through unconstitutional criminal action — and they almost got away with it. We already knew, since the end of 2016, who most of the perpetrators are. Now we know who they all are. President Trump is onboard with this plan, and he has the evidence in his top drawer.

The costs of this unprecedented criminal conspiracy to this nation and its People have been enormous and permanently damaging.
.
______________________

Comments

No, really! He's Trump's Guy and therefore the entire report was falsified! In fact... even suggesting that this is anything other than further proof of Trump's Collusion means that you are repeating Right Wing Talking Points (Tm) and therefore are personally responsible for Hillary Clinton not being president!

Mueller gave him his first government job back in 1990. They're very close. The Mueller's attended the wedding of Barr's daughter just before the redaction process began.

No, really! He's Trump's Guy and therefore the entire report was falsified! In fact... even suggesting that this is anything other than further proof of Trump's Collusion means that you are repeating Right Wing Talking Points (Tm) and therefore are personally responsible for Hillary Clinton not being president!

CONFESS!

up

24 users have voted.

—

The purpose of a writer is to keep civilization from destroying itself.
– Albert Camus

No, really! He's Trump's Guy and therefore the entire report was falsified! In fact... even suggesting that this is anything other than further proof of Trump's Collusion means that you are repeating Right Wing Talking Points (Tm) and therefore are personally responsible for Hillary Clinton not being president!

The purpose of a writer is to keep civilization from destroying itself.
– Albert Camus

The entire election of 2016, propelled by Clinton's bloodthirsty quest for power, could rival a GoT plot summary. The damage in trust, in lives, and in the entire political process is simply staggering.

up

28 users have voted.

—

Play me another broken record Joe. Maybe then I'll learn why we pay twice as much for healthcare as everybody else in the world. ~ Not Henry Kissinger

The entire election of 2016, propelled by Clinton's bloodthirsty quest for power, could rival a GoT plot summary. The damage in trust, in lives, and in the entire political process is simply staggering.

up

19 users have voted.

—

The purpose of a writer is to keep civilization from destroying itself.
– Albert Camus

I guess she must have believed the GoT allusion would attract Millenials. Maybe she perceived Cersei as a strong, heroic, but tragically misunderstood and mistreated female leader. Much like HRC sees herself.

The entire election of 2016, propelled by Clinton's bloodthirsty quest for power, could rival a GoT plot summary. The damage in trust, in lives, and in the entire political process is simply staggering.

up

4 users have voted.

—

"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep." ~Rumi

I guess she must have believed the GoT allusion would attract Millenials. Maybe she perceived Cersei as a strong, heroic, but tragically misunderstood and mistreated female leader. Much like HRC sees herself.

The purpose of a writer is to keep civilization from destroying itself.
– Albert Camus

especially for his role in challenging wheeler and harding on russi-gate large, but i'd have to add that whitney webb, born in amerika, now living in southern chile, may have a wider breadth of interests than aaron. oh, i wish i'd known of her years ago, as it would have simplified my blogging life.

it may have been a week ago that wikileaks on twitter had offered aaron congratulations for winning a superlative journalism award. alas, i couldn't find it, but did find this, and well done!:

WikiLeaks has always been confident that this investigation would vindicate our groundbreaking publishing of the 2016 materials which it has, We disapprove of the large redactions which permit conspiracy theories to abound. Full transparency please.https://t.co/n9o2eUVgI7#submit pic.twitter.com/nbvKRG57YA

especially for his role in challenging wheeler and harding on russi-gate large, but i'd have to add that whitney webb, born in amerika, now living in southern chile, may have a wider breadth of interests than aaron. oh, i wish i'd known of her years ago, as it would have simplified my blogging life.

it may have been a week ago that wikileaks on twitter had offered aaron congratulations for winning a superlative journalism award. alas, i couldn't find it, but did find this, and well done!:

WikiLeaks has always been confident that this investigation would vindicate our groundbreaking publishing of the 2016 materials which it has, We disapprove of the large redactions which permit conspiracy theories to abound. Full transparency please.https://t.co/n9o2eUVgI7#submit pic.twitter.com/nbvKRG57YA

@Lookout
British Russian conspiracy theorist Luke Harding was a classic. Aaron Mate is a wonderful journalist who actually uses the brain cells he was given to do with them what was their intended purpose...critical thinking.

I would also like to give credit to Jimmy Dore and Michael Tracey who both called BS on Russiagate from the very beginning.

they've got the ABC talking heads hollering RUSSIA. It is such BS propaganda you wouldn't believe. You're right it isn't dead. Where's the wooden stake?

Aaron Mate' does a good job dismantling it (as he has all along)...(6 min)

How is it the Steele Dossier never brought up? Created and payed for by the dims (from RUSSIA via MI6), and used as the rationale for the Trump collusion campaign.

up

19 users have voted.

—

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~Dr. Cornel West

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." John F Kennedy

#6 British Russian conspiracy theorist Luke Harding was a classic. Aaron Mate is a wonderful journalist who actually uses the brain cells he was given to do with them what was their intended purpose...critical thinking.

I would also like to give credit to Jimmy Dore and Michael Tracey who both called BS on Russiagate from the very beginning.

up

6 users have voted.

—

“It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong.”

If you would add maybe one link to each of your "you already knew" assertions.

It seems to me that much of what you're arguing hinges on naming and proving that there was somebody who copied those emails to portable media from inside the headquarters of the DNC.

Or at least come up with some suggestions as to who could have done it and how they could done it. Or such and such an individual from this group of people could have done it how, so on and so forth. Y'know all the standard Clue stuff.

...and would love to tell Congress if they will give him immunity to testify. His lawyers have made this deal with Congress and for two years his appearance has been blocked at the last minute by the DOJ and the IC and one member of the Senate.

If you would add maybe one link to each of your "you already knew" assertions.

It seems to me that much of what you're arguing hinges on naming and proving that there was somebody who copied those emails to portable media from inside the headquarters of the DNC.

Or at least come up with some suggestions as to who could have done it and how they could done it. Or such and such an individual from this group of people could have done it how, so on and so forth. Y'know all the standard Clue stuff.

up

19 users have voted.

—

The purpose of a writer is to keep civilization from destroying itself.
– Albert Camus

...and would love to tell Congress if they will give him immunity to testify. His lawyers have made this deal with Congress and for two years his appearance has been blocked at the last minute by the DOJ and the IC and one member of the Senate.

@Wally
files to Craig Murray, who carried them back to the UK. Rich, being dead, has nothing to lose from being exposed, and based on the tenor of Murray's writings, I suspect he would love nothing more than to be able to come out and say that he was the courier.

But won't he say that he can't and won't release that information lest he destroy his journalistic integrity and reputation?

I don't know what kind of deals his lawyers have offered. Are these offers documented anywhere?

up

19 users have voted.

—

The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.

#7.1.1
files to Craig Murray, who carried them back to the UK. Rich, being dead, has nothing to lose from being exposed, and based on the tenor of Murray's writings, I suspect he would love nothing more than to be able to come out and say that he was the courier.

The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.

@Wally
Generally speaking, his advocates assume that he won't compromise a source -- but perhaps he will, if the source is already dead and has nothing to gain from being protected, nor lose from being revealed.

Plutes' analysis mentions only the DNC emails.

The Podesta emails appear to have been obtained via phishing. We have only the word of untrustworthy actors that the culprit was a Russian group called Fancy Bear, and only the word of untrustworthy actors that Fancy Bear is an operation of the Russian government, and we have no word whatsoever of who took the phished emails and gave them to Wikileaks. I reserve judgement, but regardless, the Trump campaign doesn't seem to have been involved.

As to "the Clinton emails", I don't even know which emails you're referring to.

Don't forget there were emails from Clinton's server, the DNC's server, and Podesta's server.

You're suggesting a Rich to Murray to Wikileaks hookup but that's just for the DNC emails.

From where did Wikileaks get the Clinton emails and the Podesta emails?

up

15 users have voted.

—

The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.

@UntimelyRippd
Beginning to think that engaging @Wally in "conversation" is a dead-end.

#7.1.1.1.1.1.1
Generally speaking, his advocates assume that he won't compromise a source -- but perhaps he will, if the source is already dead and has nothing to gain from being protected, nor lose from being revealed.

Plutes' analysis mentions only the DNC emails.

The Podesta emails appear to have been obtained via phishing. We have only the word of untrustworthy actors that the culprit was a Russian group called Fancy Bear, and only the word of untrustworthy actors that Fancy Bear is an operation of the Russian government, and we have no word whatsoever of who took the phished emails and gave them to Wikileaks. I reserve judgement, but regardless, the Trump campaign doesn't seem to have been involved.

As to "the Clinton emails", I don't even know which emails you're referring to.

On March 16, 2016 WikiLeaks launched a searchable archive for over 30 thousand emails & email attachments sent to and from Hillary Clinton's private email server while she was Secretary of State. The 50,547 pages of documents span from 30 June 2010 to 12 August 2014. 7,570 of the documents were sent by Hillary Clinton. The emails were made available in the form of thousands of PDFs by the US State Department as a result of a Freedom of Information Act request. More PDFs were made available on February 29, 2016, and a set of additional 995 emails was imported up to February 2, 2018.

what would be the point? the reason pompeo and bolton really want him extradited to gitmo is for publishing the cia vaults, apparent stand-down ordered by comey notwithstanding. they sure as shootin' don't give a fig about which insider leaked the podesta and dnc emails, it only helped T's election.

but the reason they've only charged him far with computer fraud is that it carries a maximum of five years sentence. meaning; see? the UK and ecuador were honest when they'd claimed they won't rendite him for torture to a nation where he'll face the death penalty, althugh f course they'll file other charge later, as the original indictment inclued words used in the statutes on Espionage.

but now we're getting to the point of the recently unsealed indictment from fibbie agent megan brown on December 21, 2017, i hadn't wanted to delve into, must...needs must. and it's by way of trumped up phony charges, oscar grenfell's coverage includes this:

"The timeline presented by Brown, also provides new evidence of the motives behind the stepped-up US pursuit of Assange.

She began working with the “counter-espionage squad” targeting Assange in February 2017, the same month WikiLeaks announced that it was preparing to release a massive trove of documents from the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), dubbed Vault 7.

The documents, published over March 2017, were the most extensive exposure of the criminal methods of the CIA in more than 30 years.

They detailed the activities of a secretive division within the agency, tasked with hacking computers all over the world. The documents demonstrated that the division had developed techniques to hack into computer systems and leave “tell-tale” markers, attributing the attacks to other countries, including Russia and Iran.

Vault 7 revealed that the agency was spying on people through smart televisions and other household devices. The CIA was also seeking to develop capabilities to remotely take control of the computer systems in modern cars. Such abilities could be used in assassination operations.

The US government response to the exposures was apoplectic. In April 2017, CIA director Mike Pompeo declared that Assange was a “demon” and that WikiLeaks was a “non-state hostile intelligence service” without any first amendment rights."

not.just.a.coincidence, imo. the appeals against julian's extreme rendition could take years, of course, but cold comfort for him as he languishes in belmarsh prison, UK's gitmo. i fear the worst for him, even now.

what would be the point? the reason pompeo and bolton really want him extradited to gitmo is for publishing the cia vaults, apparent stand-down ordered by comey notwithstanding. they sure as shootin' don't give a fig about which insider leaked the podesta and dnc emails, it only helped T's election.

but the reason they've only charged him far with computer fraud is that it carries a maximum of five years sentence. meaning; see? the UK and ecuador were honest when they'd claimed they won't rendite him for torture to a nation where he'll face the death penalty, althugh f course they'll file other charge later, as the original indictment inclued words used in the statutes on Espionage.

but now we're getting to the point of the recently unsealed indictment from fibbie agent megan brown on December 21, 2017, i hadn't wanted to delve into, must...needs must. and it's by way of trumped up phony charges, oscar grenfell's coverage includes this:

"The timeline presented by Brown, also provides new evidence of the motives behind the stepped-up US pursuit of Assange.

She began working with the “counter-espionage squad” targeting Assange in February 2017, the same month WikiLeaks announced that it was preparing to release a massive trove of documents from the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), dubbed Vault 7.

The documents, published over March 2017, were the most extensive exposure of the criminal methods of the CIA in more than 30 years.

They detailed the activities of a secretive division within the agency, tasked with hacking computers all over the world. The documents demonstrated that the division had developed techniques to hack into computer systems and leave “tell-tale” markers, attributing the attacks to other countries, including Russia and Iran.

Vault 7 revealed that the agency was spying on people through smart televisions and other household devices. The CIA was also seeking to develop capabilities to remotely take control of the computer systems in modern cars. Such abilities could be used in assassination operations.

The US government response to the exposures was apoplectic. In April 2017, CIA director Mike Pompeo declared that Assange was a “demon” and that WikiLeaks was a “non-state hostile intelligence service” without any first amendment rights."

not.just.a.coincidence, imo. the appeals against julian's extreme rendition could take years, of course, but cold comfort for him as he languishes in belmarsh prison, UK's gitmo. i fear the worst for him, even now.

@Wally
...emails.
So rather than say who, he has offered to say and prove who didn't (ie Russia). That is my understanding of the deal he tried to cut and was refused. TPTB don't want that, it would ruin their narrative.

#7.1.1
files to Craig Murray, who carried them back to the UK. Rich, being dead, has nothing to lose from being exposed, and based on the tenor of Murray's writings, I suspect he would love nothing more than to be able to come out and say that he was the courier.

If you would add maybe one link to each of your "you already knew" assertions.

Most items come from a combination of sources. They are not quotes.

I'm talking to a small audience here that has spent several years witnessing the uncovering of these facts and assumptions. It is not for beginners, I'm afraid. I have a lot of confidence about the items listed. This essay follows a very specific timeline of events across six months, but only in the US.

There are other statements in this timeline I did not add because I am not yet fully confident they are complete or completely correct. The deep research on these comments was done by various experts or professionals. I analyzed them against the timeline.

There is much much more to this Hoax. There are many different timelines that cover different parts of the Hoax. The Novichok poisoning in the UK is another part of the Hoax on a different timeline. Another is the Steele dossier. Those events and participants are not included here and they have far greater implications that reach further into the future. There are also several nations involved and nearly one hundred active participants, many of them connected with intelligence agencies. None of them were investigated by Mueller. He was following a deliberate dead end providing a distraction.

I may post an infographic with all of the participants names, photos, and the roles they played in the Hoax. There are many, many people around the world who are doing this work. I am just one of them. The Hoax is still in progress.

If you would add maybe one link to each of your "you already knew" assertions.

It seems to me that much of what you're arguing hinges on naming and proving that there was somebody who copied those emails to portable media from inside the headquarters of the DNC.

Or at least come up with some suggestions as to who could have done it and how they could done it. Or such and such an individual from this group of people could have done it how, so on and so forth. Y'know all the standard Clue stuff.

up

21 users have voted.

—

The purpose of a writer is to keep civilization from destroying itself.
– Albert Camus

If you would add maybe one link to each of your "you already knew" assertions.

Most items come from a combination of sources. They are not quotes.

I'm talking to a small audience here that has spent several years witnessing the uncovering of these facts and assumptions. It is not for beginners, I'm afraid. I have a lot of confidence about the items listed. This essay follows a very specific timeline of events across six months, but only in the US.

There are other statements in this timeline I did not add because I am not yet fully confident they are complete or completely correct. The deep research on these comments was done by various experts or professionals. I analyzed them against the timeline.

There is much much more to this Hoax. There are many different timelines that cover different parts of the Hoax. The Novichok poisoning in the UK is another part of the Hoax on a different timeline. Another is the Steele dossier. Those events and participants are not included here and they have far greater implications that reach further into the future. There are also several nations involved and nearly one hundred active participants, many of them connected with intelligence agencies. None of them were investigated by Mueller. He was following a deliberate dead end providing a distraction.

I may post an infographic with all of the participants names, photos, and the roles they played in the Hoax. There are many, many people around the world who are doing this work. I am just one of them. The Hoax is still in progress.

...there is a cluster of statements he makes that are a complete fabrication. This occurs when he discusses the Russians that were indicted and the "hacking" of emails at the DNC. There's not much truth in any of that. It pertains to operative parts of the current Hoax. and covers for our foreign allies who are involved. It also preserves the narrative of Mueller's kabuki investigation.

...there is a cluster of statements he makes that are a complete fabrication. This occurs when he discusses the Russians that were indicted and the "hacking" of emails at the DNC. There's not much truth in any of that. It pertains to operative parts of the current Hoax. and covers for our foreign allies who are involved. It also preserves the narrative of Mueller's kabuki investigation.

And it's now known that there is cross-fertilization with discussion groups like Way of the Bern.

The WayoftheBern reddit group has a great deal of information posted in their sidebar that you might find helpful. Lists of links and detailed information deconstructing Russiagate, among many other subjects.

And it's now known that there is cross-fertilization with discussion groups like Way of the Bern.

The WayoftheBern reddit group has a great deal of information posted in their sidebar that you might find helpful. Lists of links and detailed information deconstructing Russiagate, among many other subjects.

up

6 users have voted.

—

The purpose of a writer is to keep civilization from destroying itself.
– Albert Camus

If you would add maybe one link to each of your "you already knew" assertions.

Most items come from a combination of sources. They are not quotes.

I'm talking to a small audience here that has spent several years witnessing the uncovering of these facts and assumptions. It is not for beginners, I'm afraid. I have a lot of confidence about the items listed. This essay follows a very specific timeline of events across six months, but only in the US.

There are other statements in this timeline I did not add because I am not yet fully confident they are complete or completely correct. The deep research on these comments was done by various experts or professionals. I analyzed them against the timeline.

There is much much more to this Hoax. There are many different timelines that cover different parts of the Hoax. The Novichok poisoning in the UK is another part of the Hoax on a different timeline. Another is the Steele dossier. Those events and participants are not included here and they have far greater implications that reach further into the future. There are also several nations involved and nearly one hundred active participants, many of them connected with intelligence agencies. None of them were investigated by Mueller. He was following a deliberate dead end providing a distraction.

I may post an infographic with all of the participants names, photos, and the roles they played in the Hoax. There are many, many people around the world who are doing this work. I am just one of them. The Hoax is still in progress.

up

10 users have voted.

—

The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.

It's much larger than the Mueller investigation. With $60 million dollars, a couple of FISA warrants, and 30 full time attorneys, I could possibly see it all the way through. But this is as far as it goes on my budget. Plus, I'm out of RAM.

“We now know that the Russian operatives who perpetrated these schemes did not have the cooperation of President Trump or the Trump campaign, or the knowing assistance of any other American,” Barr said.

Mueller’s report said that contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives spanned business connections relating to the plans for a Trump property development in Moscow, along with invitations for campaign officials, including Trump, to meet Russian officials, including the president, Vladimir Putin.

However, the special counsel did not establish that there was an overarching conspiracy between Trump’s team and the Russian government, and found insufficient grounds to bring charges for incidents including the notorious Trump Tower meeting of June 2016....
...
Mueller confirmed that he had considered charging Donald Trump Jr and Jared Kushner, his brother-in-law, for their involvement in the Trump Tower meeting, but ultimately declined.

Mueller said that by meeting Russians to receive information valuable to the campaign, Trump Jr and Kushner could have fallen foul of campaign finance laws, which bar contributions by foreigners.

But among other factors, Mueller explained, he would have faced a high burden to prove that Trump Jr had a “culpable mental state”. He said prosecutors could not be confident that they would secure convictions, which justice department rules require.

Cohen took it on himself to contact some one in Russia from what I've read and all he did was to send some guy an email about the possibility of doing that. He said that he never heard back from him. So where is the connection to Putin here?

Was Mueller aware of all the things that happened in order for the Trump tower meeting to happen? The passport issue that was fixed by Obama's state department? The dinner meeting she had with the guy from Fusion GPS after the meeting was nixed? Wasn't it to get opposition research dirt on Hillary's campaign and then she swung it around to talk about the Maginsky act? Did he know that the FBI had been trying to fix people up with their operatives in order to entrap them?

More:

He also confirmed reports that Carter Page, a Trump campaign adviser until September 2016, was “acquainted with at least two Russian intelligence officers”. Page was placed under surveillance by US intelligence after he left the campaign.

Did Mueller know that Page had previously been an FBI informant? How about Misfud telling Papadopoulus that Russia had Hillary's emails and that the meeting he then went to with the Dutch ambassador had been setup by the FBI?

How about all the unmasking that Susan Rice did that was unconstitutional? Bruce and Nellie Ohr? The bogus Steele dossier that he basically made up with help from Hillary's BFF Sydney Bluementhal? The many, many other players in this farce? Or that it was originally the British intelligence agency that spied on Trump's campaign? And the many other things that we have discussed here for over two years that proved that this was a total setup by Hillary and Obama to use over Trump in case he didn't accept the results of the election? "Oh you won't accept the fact that you lost? Here's lots of interesting information we can use against you if you don't."

Just how much information did Robert the Swan Mueller have during his investigation? Hmm?

If you would add maybe one link to each of your "you already knew" assertions.

Most items come from a combination of sources. They are not quotes.

I'm talking to a small audience here that has spent several years witnessing the uncovering of these facts and assumptions. It is not for beginners, I'm afraid. I have a lot of confidence about the items listed. This essay follows a very specific timeline of events across six months, but only in the US.

There are other statements in this timeline I did not add because I am not yet fully confident they are complete or completely correct. The deep research on these comments was done by various experts or professionals. I analyzed them against the timeline.

There is much much more to this Hoax. There are many different timelines that cover different parts of the Hoax. The Novichok poisoning in the UK is another part of the Hoax on a different timeline. Another is the Steele dossier. Those events and participants are not included here and they have far greater implications that reach further into the future. There are also several nations involved and nearly one hundred active participants, many of them connected with intelligence agencies. None of them were investigated by Mueller. He was following a deliberate dead end providing a distraction.

I may post an infographic with all of the participants names, photos, and the roles they played in the Hoax. There are many, many people around the world who are doing this work. I am just one of them. The Hoax is still in progress.

up

9 users have voted.

—

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

Trump, in Mueller’s view, may not have committed an “underlying crime” in relation to Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election — but this is frankly irrelevant to the case for impeachment. Listen to one of the 13 managers sent from your august body to prosecute the case against President Bill Clinton in the Senate in 1999. “You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job [as president] in this constitutional republic if this body determines your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role,” said then Republican representative — and now senator — Lindsay Graham. The process of impeachment, he argued, “is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”

I get what he's saying here, but Clinton did commit a crime. He perjured himself during the WH sex investigation right? I'm sure lots of people are telling the democrats to go ahead and bring charges against him anyway. We will see Barr release the unredacted report into Hillary's private email server and possibly how Trump had been setup by the Obama administration. Bet Nancy won't take the chance of this info coming out.

“We now know that the Russian operatives who perpetrated these schemes did not have the cooperation of President Trump or the Trump campaign, or the knowing assistance of any other American,” Barr said.

Mueller’s report said that contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives spanned business connections relating to the plans for a Trump property development in Moscow, along with invitations for campaign officials, including Trump, to meet Russian officials, including the president, Vladimir Putin.

However, the special counsel did not establish that there was an overarching conspiracy between Trump’s team and the Russian government, and found insufficient grounds to bring charges for incidents including the notorious Trump Tower meeting of June 2016....
...
Mueller confirmed that he had considered charging Donald Trump Jr and Jared Kushner, his brother-in-law, for their involvement in the Trump Tower meeting, but ultimately declined.

Mueller said that by meeting Russians to receive information valuable to the campaign, Trump Jr and Kushner could have fallen foul of campaign finance laws, which bar contributions by foreigners.

But among other factors, Mueller explained, he would have faced a high burden to prove that Trump Jr had a “culpable mental state”. He said prosecutors could not be confident that they would secure convictions, which justice department rules require.

Cohen took it on himself to contact some one in Russia from what I've read and all he did was to send some guy an email about the possibility of doing that. He said that he never heard back from him. So where is the connection to Putin here?

Was Mueller aware of all the things that happened in order for the Trump tower meeting to happen? The passport issue that was fixed by Obama's state department? The dinner meeting she had with the guy from Fusion GPS after the meeting was nixed? Wasn't it to get opposition research dirt on Hillary's campaign and then she swung it around to talk about the Maginsky act? Did he know that the FBI had been trying to fix people up with their operatives in order to entrap them?

More:

He also confirmed reports that Carter Page, a Trump campaign adviser until September 2016, was “acquainted with at least two Russian intelligence officers”. Page was placed under surveillance by US intelligence after he left the campaign.

Did Mueller know that Page had previously been an FBI informant? How about Misfud telling Papadopoulus that Russia had Hillary's emails and that the meeting he then went to with the Dutch ambassador had been setup by the FBI?

How about all the unmasking that Susan Rice did that was unconstitutional? Bruce and Nellie Ohr? The bogus Steele dossier that he basically made up with help from Hillary's BFF Sydney Bluementhal? The many, many other players in this farce? Or that it was originally the British intelligence agency that spied on Trump's campaign? And the many other things that we have discussed here for over two years that proved that this was a total setup by Hillary and Obama to use over Trump in case he didn't accept the results of the election? "Oh you won't accept the fact that you lost? Here's lots of interesting information we can use against you if you don't."

Just how much information did Robert the Swan Mueller have during his investigation? Hmm?

... in a state of poor mental hygiene. I can see why you were dismayed. But I was rather pleased to see the comments pushing back with such vigor. Someone posted this one:

VIPS Fault Mueller Probe, Criticize Refusal to Interview Assange

MEMORANDUM

FOR: The PresidentFROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)SUBJECT: The Fly in the Mueller Ointment

April 16, 2019

Mr. President:

"If, as we strongly suspect, Mueller is relying for forensics solely on CrowdStrike, the discredited firm hired by the DNC in the spring of 2016, he is acting more in the mold of Inspector Clouseau than the crackerjack investigator he is reputed to be. It simply does not suffice for Mueller’s former colleague James Comey to tell Congress that CrowdStrike is a “high-class entity.” It is nothing of the sort and, in addition to its documented incompetence, it is riddled with conflicts of interest. Comey needs to explain why he kept the FBI away from the DNC computers after they were said to have been “hacked.” And former National Intelligence Director James Clapper needs to explain his claim last November that “the forensic evidence was overwhelming about what the Russians had done.” What forensic evidence? From CrowdStrike? We at VIPS, in contrast, are finding more and more forensic evidence that the DNC emails were leaked, not hacked by the Russians or anyone else — and that “Guccifer 2.0” is an out-and-out fraud. Yes, we can prove that from forensics too."

Political Enemies & Mainstream Media (Forgive the Redundancy)

You may be unaware that in March 2017 lawyers for Assange and the Justice Department (acting on behalf of the CIA) reportedly were very close to an agreement under which Assange would agree to discuss “technical evidence ruling out certain parties” in the leak of the DNC emails” and agree to redact some classified CIA information, in exchange for limited immunity. According to the investigative reporter John Solomon of The Hill, Sen. Mark Warner, D,VA, Vice Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, learned of the incipient deal and told then-FBI Director Comey, who ordered an abrupt “stand down” and an end to the discussions with Assange.

But you are the president. And there may be no better time than now to face them down, show the spurious nature of the concocted “evidence” attempting to put you in “Putin’s pocket,” and — not least — lift the cloud that has prevented you from pursuing a more decent relationship with Russia."

“We now know that the Russian operatives who perpetrated these schemes did not have the cooperation of President Trump or the Trump campaign, or the knowing assistance of any other American,” Barr said.

Mueller’s report said that contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives spanned business connections relating to the plans for a Trump property development in Moscow, along with invitations for campaign officials, including Trump, to meet Russian officials, including the president, Vladimir Putin.

However, the special counsel did not establish that there was an overarching conspiracy between Trump’s team and the Russian government, and found insufficient grounds to bring charges for incidents including the notorious Trump Tower meeting of June 2016....
...
Mueller confirmed that he had considered charging Donald Trump Jr and Jared Kushner, his brother-in-law, for their involvement in the Trump Tower meeting, but ultimately declined.

Mueller said that by meeting Russians to receive information valuable to the campaign, Trump Jr and Kushner could have fallen foul of campaign finance laws, which bar contributions by foreigners.

But among other factors, Mueller explained, he would have faced a high burden to prove that Trump Jr had a “culpable mental state”. He said prosecutors could not be confident that they would secure convictions, which justice department rules require.

Cohen took it on himself to contact some one in Russia from what I've read and all he did was to send some guy an email about the possibility of doing that. He said that he never heard back from him. So where is the connection to Putin here?

Was Mueller aware of all the things that happened in order for the Trump tower meeting to happen? The passport issue that was fixed by Obama's state department? The dinner meeting she had with the guy from Fusion GPS after the meeting was nixed? Wasn't it to get opposition research dirt on Hillary's campaign and then she swung it around to talk about the Maginsky act? Did he know that the FBI had been trying to fix people up with their operatives in order to entrap them?

More:

He also confirmed reports that Carter Page, a Trump campaign adviser until September 2016, was “acquainted with at least two Russian intelligence officers”. Page was placed under surveillance by US intelligence after he left the campaign.

Did Mueller know that Page had previously been an FBI informant? How about Misfud telling Papadopoulus that Russia had Hillary's emails and that the meeting he then went to with the Dutch ambassador had been setup by the FBI?

How about all the unmasking that Susan Rice did that was unconstitutional? Bruce and Nellie Ohr? The bogus Steele dossier that he basically made up with help from Hillary's BFF Sydney Bluementhal? The many, many other players in this farce? Or that it was originally the British intelligence agency that spied on Trump's campaign? And the many other things that we have discussed here for over two years that proved that this was a total setup by Hillary and Obama to use over Trump in case he didn't accept the results of the election? "Oh you won't accept the fact that you lost? Here's lots of interesting information we can use against you if you don't."

Just how much information did Robert the Swan Mueller have during his investigation? Hmm?

... in a state of poor mental hygiene. I can see why you were dismayed. But I was rather pleased to see the comments pushing back with such vigor. Someone posted this one:

VIPS Fault Mueller Probe, Criticize Refusal to Interview Assange

MEMORANDUM

FOR: The PresidentFROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)SUBJECT: The Fly in the Mueller Ointment

April 16, 2019

Mr. President:

"If, as we strongly suspect, Mueller is relying for forensics solely on CrowdStrike, the discredited firm hired by the DNC in the spring of 2016, he is acting more in the mold of Inspector Clouseau than the crackerjack investigator he is reputed to be. It simply does not suffice for Mueller’s former colleague James Comey to tell Congress that CrowdStrike is a “high-class entity.” It is nothing of the sort and, in addition to its documented incompetence, it is riddled with conflicts of interest. Comey needs to explain why he kept the FBI away from the DNC computers after they were said to have been “hacked.” And former National Intelligence Director James Clapper needs to explain his claim last November that “the forensic evidence was overwhelming about what the Russians had done.” What forensic evidence? From CrowdStrike? We at VIPS, in contrast, are finding more and more forensic evidence that the DNC emails were leaked, not hacked by the Russians or anyone else — and that “Guccifer 2.0” is an out-and-out fraud. Yes, we can prove that from forensics too."

Political Enemies & Mainstream Media (Forgive the Redundancy)

You may be unaware that in March 2017 lawyers for Assange and the Justice Department (acting on behalf of the CIA) reportedly were very close to an agreement under which Assange would agree to discuss “technical evidence ruling out certain parties” in the leak of the DNC emails” and agree to redact some classified CIA information, in exchange for limited immunity. According to the investigative reporter John Solomon of The Hill, Sen. Mark Warner, D,VA, Vice Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, learned of the incipient deal and told then-FBI Director Comey, who ordered an abrupt “stand down” and an end to the discussions with Assange.

But you are the president. And there may be no better time than now to face them down, show the spurious nature of the concocted “evidence” attempting to put you in “Putin’s pocket,” and — not least — lift the cloud that has prevented you from pursuing a more decent relationship with Russia."

The purpose of a writer is to keep civilization from destroying itself.
– Albert Camus

twitter accounts they might signal something else, and although chuck schumer never offered up a senate version of this poisonous, but illustrative HB1, bruce dixon covers it quite well in his jan. 2019 ‘House Democrats’ HR 1 – Faking the Funk on Voting Rights, Spreading Fear and Gunning For the Greens in 2020’

“There are only 2 pieces of HR 1 which are NOT empty 2020 campaign promises, and which have a reasonable change of becoming law. Really, really BAD law.

1.HR 1 Requires that the “intelligence community” produce a yearly report on threats to the US electoral system.

HR 1 directly cites the odious McCarthyite accusations of Prop or Not from two years ago as “congressional findings.” These baseless lies assert that left opposition ion the part of the American people to the two capitalist parties is motivated and manipulated by hostile foreign powers operating in social media, grassroots organizations and other places, and that these are imminent threats to national security, specifically the security of the US electoral process. Black Agenda Report is specifically named, the only black owned and operated entity thus fingered.

HR 1 requires the FBI, CIA, the Pentagon, DEA, NSA, Homeland Security and the rest of the so-called “intelligence community” – the same people who told us Saddam Hussein had nukes, that the government has never and will never intercept or record your email and online habits, and now says that “black identity extremists” are out to get us – HR 1 requires those professional perjurers, liars and deceivers to produce a yearly report on their manufactured threats to US electoral systems, specifically including the threats to national security by those who express dissident opinions. This part of HR 1 institutionalizes the notion that the left is an existential and foreign-sponsored threat to the security of the electoral process, and creates bodies to police social media. If they really tried, corporate Democrats in the House and Senate really stand a fair chance at getting the modest number of Republican sign-ons to make this a bipartisan thing, and pass it to President Trump to sign."

@wendy davis
intel report by whether or not it identifies these, in order, as the top three threats:
A. Electronic voting.
B. Voter ID and similar legislation that suppresses voting in certain communities
C. Executive action that suppresses voting (e.g., secretaries of state making voting inaccessible to certain communities).

twitter accounts they might signal something else, and although chuck schumer never offered up a senate version of this poisonous, but illustrative HB1, bruce dixon covers it quite well in his jan. 2019 ‘House Democrats’ HR 1 – Faking the Funk on Voting Rights, Spreading Fear and Gunning For the Greens in 2020’

“There are only 2 pieces of HR 1 which are NOT empty 2020 campaign promises, and which have a reasonable change of becoming law. Really, really BAD law.

1.HR 1 Requires that the “intelligence community” produce a yearly report on threats to the US electoral system.

HR 1 directly cites the odious McCarthyite accusations of Prop or Not from two years ago as “congressional findings.” These baseless lies assert that left opposition ion the part of the American people to the two capitalist parties is motivated and manipulated by hostile foreign powers operating in social media, grassroots organizations and other places, and that these are imminent threats to national security, specifically the security of the US electoral process. Black Agenda Report is specifically named, the only black owned and operated entity thus fingered.

HR 1 requires the FBI, CIA, the Pentagon, DEA, NSA, Homeland Security and the rest of the so-called “intelligence community” – the same people who told us Saddam Hussein had nukes, that the government has never and will never intercept or record your email and online habits, and now says that “black identity extremists” are out to get us – HR 1 requires those professional perjurers, liars and deceivers to produce a yearly report on their manufactured threats to US electoral systems, specifically including the threats to national security by those who express dissident opinions. This part of HR 1 institutionalizes the notion that the left is an existential and foreign-sponsored threat to the security of the electoral process, and creates bodies to police social media. If they really tried, corporate Democrats in the House and Senate really stand a fair chance at getting the modest number of Republican sign-ons to make this a bipartisan thing, and pass it to President Trump to sign."

brilliant of them; they can campaign on that for 2020, too. i have an idea! let's call it democracy for some™!

up

8 users have voted.

—

The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.

and report back; i have no idea of the order. it's somewhere in this earlier diary i'd posted: the epic barriers to Third Party candidates

#8.1
intel report by whether or not it identifies these, in order, as the top three threats:
A. Electronic voting.
B. Voter ID and similar legislation that suppresses voting in certain communities
C. Executive action that suppresses voting (e.g., secretaries of state making voting inaccessible to certain communities).

The purpose of a writer is to keep civilization from destroying itself.
– Albert Camus

Great summary! I imagine the Dems are going to launch endless "investigations" that will go nowhere so Rachel and the rest of the chattering class can continue bloviating. And meanwhile, Rome burns .....

The democrats are asking Mueller to come to congress and talk to them about his report, but I'm betting that he's now on vacation after working so hard the last two years burbling up this fantasy. This is like Fitzmas all over again. He can't say that Trump colluded with Vlad, but he can't say that he didn't. But what that does is leave the possibility of congress finding something if they do enough investigating. Just look at the front page of ToP to see how this is being framed. Oh and whilst you're there don't forget to sign a petition asking democrats to subpoena Mueller.

This is going to go on for two more years and people are still
left with the idea that Russia interfered with the election. Psst..they didn't.

Good to see you again.

Great summary! I imagine the Dems are going to launch endless "investigations" that will go nowhere so Rachel and the rest of the chattering class can continue bloviating. And meanwhile, Rome burns .....

up

11 users have voted.

—

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

Indeed, those of us that have been on this site for a few years, now, DO ALREADY KNOW all of the items you outlined. Indeed - we KNEW!!! Links are not necessary - any curious person can go though the c99p essays and find all the evidence. Any curious person can read Chris Hedges, Glenn Greenwald, Aaron Mate, the Real News Network, and especially, Jimmy Dore. Have at it! Beautifully done!

up

17 users have voted.

—

“It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong.”

I'm too lazy otherwise to look to prove an argument I'm not making, especially going through 3 and some years of archives. And while I like C99%, I don't consider it like Evangelicals look at the Bible.

But I have been reading left sources since this whole mess began in 2016 and I simply can't say I know all of what's been claimed in the essay.

How do you think the DNC emails made their way to Wikileaks?

Indeed, those of us that have been on this site for a few years, now, DO ALREADY KNOW all of the items you outlined. Indeed - we KNEW!!! Links are not necessary - any curious person can go though the c99p essays and find all the evidence. Any curious person can read Chris Hedges, Glenn Greenwald, Aaron Mate, the Real News Network, and especially, Jimmy Dore. Have at it! Beautifully done!

i haven't got the time to provide links for all of pluto's major assertions, though i can tell you as a person that pays attention to a variety of news sources that there are sources that i have read for pretty much all of them.

but, if you are interested, here's an article that you could start with:

I'm too lazy otherwise to look to prove an argument I'm not making, especially going through 3 and some years of archives. And while I like C99%, I don't consider it like Evangelicals look at the Bible.

But I have been reading left sources since this whole mess began in 2016 and I simply can't say I know all of what's been claimed in the essay.

I've been a big fan of Robert Parry from way back. Sad that he's left us.

VIPS claim that they "can prove that the conventional-wisdom story about Russian-hacking-DNC-emails-for-WikiLeaks is false" but have not been given the chance to provide congressional or other governmental testimony. But they also admit "We do not claim our conclusions are 'irrefutable and undeniable."

I do think they've gone a long way in debunking the narrative that's been crammed down our throats. But I'd also like to get some alternative idea of how those documents wound up in the hands of Wikileaks, other than the indictments of the Russian officials.

This is aside from whether or not I think Assange is a hero or if he's getting a raw deal (both of which I do).

Finally, I think the Russians would be idiots not to be puckstering around with their intelligence apparatus especially given all the shit that our intelligence community has thrown at them. In any event, any claims that they had more than a miniscule impact on the election, I find ludicrous.

i haven't got the time to provide links for all of pluto's major assertions, though i can tell you as a person that pays attention to a variety of news sources that there are sources that i have read for pretty much all of them.

but, if you are interested, here's an article that you could start with:

I do think they've gone a long way in debunking the narrative that's been crammed down our throats.

which is the most important thing about their work. it is incumbent upon the accuser (the government/its prosecutors) to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that their accusations are true. vips work impeaches their credibility.

they do not have to show how an action occurred, only that the government's contention is not up to a standard of reliability.

But I'd also like to get some alternative idea of how those documents wound up in the hands of Wikileaks, other than the indictments of the Russian officials.

sure, we'd all like to know that. there are people who know. if it is important to know, presumably the government will make a deal that is satisfactory to all parties and the knowledge will be imparted.

my guess is that the government does not care how the documents got into wikileaks hands. they had all of the resources that they needed to determine whether and how the documents were hacked. they declined to examine the servers and instead chose to rely upon the word of a government contractor (crowdstrike) whose reliability might reasonably be questioned.

I've been a big fan of Robert Parry from way back. Sad that he's left us.

VIPS claim that they "can prove that the conventional-wisdom story about Russian-hacking-DNC-emails-for-WikiLeaks is false" but have not been given the chance to provide congressional or other governmental testimony. But they also admit "We do not claim our conclusions are 'irrefutable and undeniable."

I do think they've gone a long way in debunking the narrative that's been crammed down our throats. But I'd also like to get some alternative idea of how those documents wound up in the hands of Wikileaks, other than the indictments of the Russian officials.

This is aside from whether or not I think Assange is a hero or if he's getting a raw deal (both of which I do).

Finally, I think the Russians would be idiots not to be puckstering around with their intelligence apparatus especially given all the shit that our intelligence community has thrown at them. In any event, any claims that they had more than a miniscule impact on the election, I find ludicrous.

@Wally
emails got to Wikileaks? Only Assange and the folks at Wikileaks know that answer. Why do you think anyone here could possibly know that or are you being snarky?

As I said above, most of us here have been following this Faux-Russia collusion narrative since it's inception. You seem to be new here, so sorry for me dissing you wanting links to what Pluto wrote. To me, you are questioning what Pluto wrote, while most of us here UNDERSTAND what Pluto wrote because we've been reading articles all along.

If, as you say, you are too lazy to go look this stuff up, then why is it incumbent on the rest of us to provide you with what you are unwilling to do yourself?

I'm too lazy otherwise to look to prove an argument I'm not making, especially going through 3 and some years of archives. And while I like C99%, I don't consider it like Evangelicals look at the Bible.

But I have been reading left sources since this whole mess began in 2016 and I simply can't say I know all of what's been claimed in the essay.

How do you think the DNC emails made their way to Wikileaks?

up

10 users have voted.

—

“It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong.”

I accept your apology for dissing me. And I have been reading articles from leftist political analysts too. For a long time. Decades and decades.

Yes, I am questioning what Pluto and others wrote. I don't see how that amounts to bad form or is any way impolite.

I was joking about being lazy. But I do agree with Bob S. that it's helpful (although he's stated it more forcefully) to back up claims with some sourcing. It simply makes for a stronger argument. If I ask for some help, I can accept being told to fuck off but I'd still appreciate the help.

As I noted to my thank you to Pluto, I don't think this forum is as closed as some folks might think it is. I think there's a more diverse readership than the majority of comments made indicates. And we now know there is cross-fertilization with other groups such as Way of the Bern.

#10.1
emails got to Wikileaks? Only Assange and the folks at Wikileaks know that answer. Why do you think anyone here could possibly know that or are you being snarky?

As I said above, most of us here have been following this Faux-Russia collusion narrative since it's inception. You seem to be new here, so sorry for me dissing you wanting links to what Pluto wrote. To me, you are questioning what Pluto wrote, while most of us here UNDERSTAND what Pluto wrote because we've been reading articles all along.

If, as you say, you are too lazy to go look this stuff up, then why is it incumbent on the rest of us to provide you with what you are unwilling to do yourself?

wally, since it appears that you are relatively new here, there have been countless discussions of these issues and articles posted over a period of time here. pluto's piece is part of a running discussion amongst a lot of folks on this site.

i agree that if this piece were to be considered as a stand-alone document, it would fail to meet the sort of standards of support that are common in internet argumentation. it's just that this is not that sort of piece.

which is not to say that the sort of piece that you're looking for is not a desirable thing or that you should be personally satisfied in your quest for knowledge by this. i encourage you to look into the details of the claims that pluto brings up if they interest you.

if you come up blank somewhere after a good faith effort to find something, feel free post an essay requesting information. this is a topic that a lot of people here have been focusing on for some time and i'm certain that somebody will be able to easily locate the information you're looking for.

I accept your apology for dissing me. And I have been reading articles from leftist political analysts too. For a long time. Decades and decades.

Yes, I am questioning what Pluto and others wrote. I don't see how that amounts to bad form or is any way impolite.

I was joking about being lazy. But I do agree with Bob S. that it's helpful (although he's stated it more forcefully) to back up claims with some sourcing. It simply makes for a stronger argument. If I ask for some help, I can accept being told to fuck off but I'd still appreciate the help.

As I noted to my thank you to Pluto, I don't think this forum is as closed as some folks might think it is. I think there's a more diverse readership than the majority of comments made indicates. And we now know there is cross-fertilization with other groups such as Way of the Bern.

I'm too lazy otherwise to look to prove an argument I'm not making, especially going through 3 and some years of archives. And while I like C99%, I don't consider it like Evangelicals look at the Bible.

But I have been reading left sources since this whole mess began in 2016 and I simply can't say I know all of what's been claimed in the essay.

you're too lazy to look through the site and find them yourself, but you want others to do that for you? Why? Here's an easy start. Look at the essays that Pluto and I have written. Then you can google the deal with Assange and Comey. Or DuckDuckGo would probably be better. This issue was talked about here recently but I don't remember whose essay it was in.

Consortium news has an essay about some of this stuff. You can try looking there.

The U.S. was in talks for a deal with Julian Assange but then FBI Director James Comey ordered an end to negotiations after Assange offered to prove Russia was not involved in the DNC leak, as Ray McGovern explains.

By Ray McGovern

An explosive report by investigative journalist John Solomon on the opinion page of Monday’s edition of The Hill sheds a bright light on how Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) and then-FBI Director James Comey collaborated to prevent WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange from discussing “technical evidence ruling out certain parties [read Russia]” in the controversial leak of Democratic Party emails to WikiLeaks during the 2016 election.

A deal that was being discussed last year between Assange and U.S. government officials would have given Assange “limited immunity” to allow him to leave the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where he has been exiled for six years. In exchange, Assange would agree to limit through redactions “some classified CIA information he might release in the future,” according to Solomon, who cited “interviews and a trove of internal DOJ documents turned over to Senate investigators.” Solomon even provided a copy of the draft immunity deal with Assange.

But Comey’s intervention to stop the negotiations with Assange ultimately ruined the deal, Solomon says, quoting “multiple sources.” With the prospective agreement thrown into serious doubt, Assange “unleashed a series of leaks that U.S. officials say damaged their cyber warfare capabilities for a long time to come.” These were the Vault 7 releases, which led then CIA Director Mike Pompeo to call WikiLeaks “a hostile intelligence service.”

Solomon’s report provides reasons why Official Washington has now put so much pressure on Ecuador to keep Assange incommunicado in its embassy in London.

The report does not say what led Comey to intervene to ruin the talks with Assange. But it came after Assange had offered to “provide technical evidence and discussion regarding who did not engage in the DNC releases,” Solomon quotes WikiLeaks’ intermediary with the government as saying. It would be a safe assumption that Assange was offering to prove that Russia was not WikiLeaks’ source of the DNC emails.

If that was the reason Comey and Warner ruined the talks, as is likely, it would reveal a cynical decision to put U.S. intelligence agents and highly sophisticated cybertools at risk, rather than allow Assange to at least attempt to prove that Russia was not behind the DNC leak.

The greater risk to Warner and Comey apparently would have been if Assange provided evidence that Russia played no role in the 2016 leaks of DNC documents.

Missteps and Stand Down

In mid-February 2017, in a remarkable display of naiveté, Adam Waldman, Assange’s pro bono attorney who acted as the intermediary in the talks, asked Warner if the Senate Intelligence Committee staff would like any contact with Assange to ask about Russia or other issues. Waldman was apparently oblivious to Sen. Warner’s stoking of Russia-gate.

Warner contacted Comey and, invoking his name, instructed Waldman to “stand down and end the discussions with Assange,” Waldman told Solomon. The “stand down” instruction “did happen,” according to another of Solomon’s sources with good access to Warner. However, Waldman’s counterpart attorney David Laufman, an accomplished federal prosecutor picked by the Justice Departent to work the government side of the CIA-Assange fledgling deal, told Waldman, “That’s B.S. You’re not standing down, and neither am I.”

But the damage had been done. When word of the original stand-down order reached WikiLeaks, trust evaporated, putting an end to two months of what Waldman called “constructive, principled discussions that included the Department of Justice.”

The two sides had come within inches of sealing the deal. Writing to Laufman on March 28, 2017, Waldman gave him Assange’s offer to discuss “risk mitigation approaches relating to CIA documents in WikiLeaks’ possession or control, such as the redaction of Agency personnel in hostile jurisdictions,” in return for “an acceptable immunity and safe passage agreement.”

On March 31, 2017, though, WikiLeaks released the most damaging disclosure up to that point from what it called “Vault 7” — a treasure trove of CIA cybertools leaked from CIA files. This disclosure featured the tool “Marble Framework,” which enabled the CIA to hack into computers, disguise who hacked in, and falsely attribute the hack to someone else by leaving so-called tell-tale signs — like Cyrillic, for example. The CIA documents also showed that the “Marble” tool had been employed in 2016.

Misfeasance or Malfeasance

Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, which includes among our members two former Technical Directors of the National Security Agency, has repeatedly called attention to its conclusion that the DNC emails were leaked — not “hacked” by Russia or anyone else (and, later, our suspicion that someone may have been playing Marbles, so to speak).

In fact, VIPS and independent forensic investigators, have performed what former FBI Director Comey — at first inexplicably, now not so inexplicably — failed to do when the so-called “Russian hack” of the DNC was first reported. In July 2017 VIPS published its key findings with supporting data.

Two month later, VIPS published the results of follow-up experiments conducted to test the conclusions reached in July.

Why did then FBI Director Comey fail to insist on getting direct access to the DNC computers in order to follow best-practice forensics to discover who intruded into the DNC computers? (Recall, at the time Sen. John McCain and others were calling the “Russian hack” no less than an “act of war.”) A 7th grader can now figure that out.

Asked on January 10, 2017 by Senate Intelligence Committee chair Richard Burr (R-NC) whether direct access to the servers and devices would have helped the FBI in their investigation, Comey replied: “Our forensics folks would always prefer to get access to the original device or server that’s involved, so it’s the best evidence.”

At that point, Burr and Warner let Comey down easy. Hence, it should come as no surprise that, according to one of John Solomon’s sources, Sen. Warner (who is co-chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee) kept Sen. Burr apprised of his intervention into the negotiation with Assange, leading to its collapse.

They think they are going to get away with this and so many more conspiracy crimes related to the Russia Hoax.

you're too lazy to look through the site and find them yourself, but you want others to do that for you? Why? Here's an easy start. Look at the essays that Pluto and I have written. Then you can google the deal with Assange and Comey. Or DuckDuckGo would probably be better. This issue was talked about here recently but I don't remember whose essay it was in.

Consortium news has an essay about some of this stuff. You can try looking there.

up

11 users have voted.

—

The purpose of a writer is to keep civilization from destroying itself.
– Albert Camus

Of course they had to kill the deal because Russia Gate would have come off the tracks if Assange showed that Russia did not give them the emails. He could have also shown how it was Hillary's BFFs who said that people need to blame Russia for them so that people would focus on the fact that they rigged the primary against Bernie.

The U.S. was in talks for a deal with Julian Assange but then FBI Director James Comey ordered an end to negotiations after Assange offered to prove Russia was not involved in the DNC leak, as Ray McGovern explains.

By Ray McGovern

An explosive report by investigative journalist John Solomon on the opinion page of Monday’s edition of The Hill sheds a bright light on how Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) and then-FBI Director James Comey collaborated to prevent WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange from discussing “technical evidence ruling out certain parties [read Russia]” in the controversial leak of Democratic Party emails to WikiLeaks during the 2016 election.

A deal that was being discussed last year between Assange and U.S. government officials would have given Assange “limited immunity” to allow him to leave the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where he has been exiled for six years. In exchange, Assange would agree to limit through redactions “some classified CIA information he might release in the future,” according to Solomon, who cited “interviews and a trove of internal DOJ documents turned over to Senate investigators.” Solomon even provided a copy of the draft immunity deal with Assange.

But Comey’s intervention to stop the negotiations with Assange ultimately ruined the deal, Solomon says, quoting “multiple sources.” With the prospective agreement thrown into serious doubt, Assange “unleashed a series of leaks that U.S. officials say damaged their cyber warfare capabilities for a long time to come.” These were the Vault 7 releases, which led then CIA Director Mike Pompeo to call WikiLeaks “a hostile intelligence service.”

Solomon’s report provides reasons why Official Washington has now put so much pressure on Ecuador to keep Assange incommunicado in its embassy in London.

The report does not say what led Comey to intervene to ruin the talks with Assange. But it came after Assange had offered to “provide technical evidence and discussion regarding who did not engage in the DNC releases,” Solomon quotes WikiLeaks’ intermediary with the government as saying. It would be a safe assumption that Assange was offering to prove that Russia was not WikiLeaks’ source of the DNC emails.

If that was the reason Comey and Warner ruined the talks, as is likely, it would reveal a cynical decision to put U.S. intelligence agents and highly sophisticated cybertools at risk, rather than allow Assange to at least attempt to prove that Russia was not behind the DNC leak.

The greater risk to Warner and Comey apparently would have been if Assange provided evidence that Russia played no role in the 2016 leaks of DNC documents.

Missteps and Stand Down

In mid-February 2017, in a remarkable display of naiveté, Adam Waldman, Assange’s pro bono attorney who acted as the intermediary in the talks, asked Warner if the Senate Intelligence Committee staff would like any contact with Assange to ask about Russia or other issues. Waldman was apparently oblivious to Sen. Warner’s stoking of Russia-gate.

Warner contacted Comey and, invoking his name, instructed Waldman to “stand down and end the discussions with Assange,” Waldman told Solomon. The “stand down” instruction “did happen,” according to another of Solomon’s sources with good access to Warner. However, Waldman’s counterpart attorney David Laufman, an accomplished federal prosecutor picked by the Justice Departent to work the government side of the CIA-Assange fledgling deal, told Waldman, “That’s B.S. You’re not standing down, and neither am I.”

But the damage had been done. When word of the original stand-down order reached WikiLeaks, trust evaporated, putting an end to two months of what Waldman called “constructive, principled discussions that included the Department of Justice.”

The two sides had come within inches of sealing the deal. Writing to Laufman on March 28, 2017, Waldman gave him Assange’s offer to discuss “risk mitigation approaches relating to CIA documents in WikiLeaks’ possession or control, such as the redaction of Agency personnel in hostile jurisdictions,” in return for “an acceptable immunity and safe passage agreement.”

On March 31, 2017, though, WikiLeaks released the most damaging disclosure up to that point from what it called “Vault 7” — a treasure trove of CIA cybertools leaked from CIA files. This disclosure featured the tool “Marble Framework,” which enabled the CIA to hack into computers, disguise who hacked in, and falsely attribute the hack to someone else by leaving so-called tell-tale signs — like Cyrillic, for example. The CIA documents also showed that the “Marble” tool had been employed in 2016.

Misfeasance or Malfeasance

Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, which includes among our members two former Technical Directors of the National Security Agency, has repeatedly called attention to its conclusion that the DNC emails were leaked — not “hacked” by Russia or anyone else (and, later, our suspicion that someone may have been playing Marbles, so to speak).

In fact, VIPS and independent forensic investigators, have performed what former FBI Director Comey — at first inexplicably, now not so inexplicably — failed to do when the so-called “Russian hack” of the DNC was first reported. In July 2017 VIPS published its key findings with supporting data.

Two month later, VIPS published the results of follow-up experiments conducted to test the conclusions reached in July.

Why did then FBI Director Comey fail to insist on getting direct access to the DNC computers in order to follow best-practice forensics to discover who intruded into the DNC computers? (Recall, at the time Sen. John McCain and others were calling the “Russian hack” no less than an “act of war.”) A 7th grader can now figure that out.

Asked on January 10, 2017 by Senate Intelligence Committee chair Richard Burr (R-NC) whether direct access to the servers and devices would have helped the FBI in their investigation, Comey replied: “Our forensics folks would always prefer to get access to the original device or server that’s involved, so it’s the best evidence.”

At that point, Burr and Warner let Comey down easy. Hence, it should come as no surprise that, according to one of John Solomon’s sources, Sen. Warner (who is co-chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee) kept Sen. Burr apprised of his intervention into the negotiation with Assange, leading to its collapse.

They think they are going to get away with this and so many more conspiracy crimes related to the Russia Hoax.

If they do, it will be over Julian Assange's dead body.

up

11 users have voted.

—

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

@Wally
maybe slowing down a bit might help. Bobbing and weaving through comment threads like The Energizer Bunny will be construed by many authors and commentators as an attempt to control the narrative.

#10.1.3.1
maybe slowing down a bit might help. Bobbing and weaving through comment threads like The Energizer Bunny will be construed by many authors and commentators as an attempt to control the narrative.

up

7 users have voted.

—

The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.

At any rate, I actually really, really appreciate your likening me to the energizer bunny.

I think I'm gonna mosey on but I wish everyone well and appreciate folks for engaging me.

#10.1.3.1
maybe slowing down a bit might help. Bobbing and weaving through comment threads like The Energizer Bunny will be construed by many authors and commentators as an attempt to control the narrative.

@Wally
You ask, again, how did the DNC emails get to Wikileaks. Plutes wrote this:

You already knew that those emails were copied to portable media from inside the headquarters of the DNC.

You already knew that the copied emails were given to a former Britich Ambassador, who carried them to London and passed them to Wikileaks.

I'm now going to correct the additional details I gave you upthread. I said that Craig Murray (the ambassador cited above) was the courier for the original DNC emails. I just went back to re-read what he has said and written on the matter, and in fact he claimed to be the courier for a later set of emails, presumably the Podesta files, which he claimed were handed to him by an intermediary for the person who originally copied them.
He has implied that the same person was the source for both leaks -- but the one meeting he specifically describes was in September 2016, well after the original DNC leaks were published. (If he has elsewhere suggested that he also collected the original DNC emails, I have not seen that ...)
He is not vague:

'Neither of [the leaks] came from the Russians,' Murray said. 'The source had legal access to the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks.'

He said the leakers were motivated by 'disgust at the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and the tilting of the primary election playing field against Bernie Sanders.'

His September visit was well-documented, because he was initially denied a visa waiver (he was emceeing an award banquet), having pretty much made himself persona non grata as a vocal opponent of the US international torture protocol.
He hasn't, to my knowledge, commented on how the earlier DNC emails made their way from the leaker to Wikileaks, but he's pretty straightforward about the fact that both sets of emails came from the same source (or sources, two or more people acting in concert).
At the time of Rich's murder, he made clear his own assumption that Rich was assassinated. I'm sure that if I were Craig Murray, and knew what he knows, that would be my assumption. As an outsider, I'd like to see something more rigorous than just pointing out the absurdities in the official story. Maybe it really was just a robbery gone wrong. The question is, though, why would Murray have any reason to think it was a political assassination unless he knew that Rich had leaked the files?

I'm too lazy otherwise to look to prove an argument I'm not making, especially going through 3 and some years of archives. And while I like C99%, I don't consider it like Evangelicals look at the Bible.

But I have been reading left sources since this whole mess began in 2016 and I simply can't say I know all of what's been claimed in the essay.

How do you think the DNC emails made their way to Wikileaks?

up

15 users have voted.

—

The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.

@Wally
To be absolutely precise, Murray never directly asserts what it was that he brought back in September 2016 -- only that he met with an associate of the leaker, received a package, and carried back to the UK.
He further asserts that he has met, face to face, the actual leaker.

Thus, he is claiming direct first-person knowledge of the people involved, as well as participation in moving something from them to Wikileaks.

I'm too lazy otherwise to look to prove an argument I'm not making, especially going through 3 and some years of archives. And while I like C99%, I don't consider it like Evangelicals look at the Bible.

But I have been reading left sources since this whole mess began in 2016 and I simply can't say I know all of what's been claimed in the essay.

How do you think the DNC emails made their way to Wikileaks?

up

12 users have voted.

—

The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.

“The Podesta emails and the DNC emails are, of course, two separate things and we shouldn’t conclude that they both have the same source,” Murray said. “In both cases we’re talking of a leak, not a hack, in that the person who was responsible for getting that information out had legal access to that information…

Scott Horton then asked, “Is it fair to say that you’re saying that the Podesta leak came from inside the intelligence services, NSA [the electronic spying National Security Agency] or another agency?”

“I think what I said was certainly compatible with that kind of interpretation, yeah,” Murray responded. “In both cases they are leaks by Americans.”

EDIT TO ADD:
The consortium news quotes of the Scott Horton article say Murray explicitly doubts that whatever he brought back to the UK included any of the published leaks:

Murray has disputed a report in London’s Daily Mail that he was receiving a batch of the leaked Democratic emails. “The material, I think, was already safely with WikiLeaks before I got there in September,” Murray said in the interview with Scott Horton. “I had a small role to play.”

This would be a lot easier if so many people hadn't published conflicting accounts of whatever it is that Murray has said.

I'm too lazy otherwise to look to prove an argument I'm not making, especially going through 3 and some years of archives. And while I like C99%, I don't consider it like Evangelicals look at the Bible.

But I have been reading left sources since this whole mess began in 2016 and I simply can't say I know all of what's been claimed in the essay.

How do you think the DNC emails made their way to Wikileaks?

up

16 users have voted.

—

The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.

partisan clowns slap the label "radical left" on the center-right neoliberal clowns of the democratic party.

most of the radical left, Democrat or otherwise, has been expressing contempt for the Russiagate narrative pretty much from day 1 -- and not because any/many of us have anything resembling love for Donald Trump.

up

22 users have voted.

—

The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.

@UntimelyRippd
Calling the mainstream Dems the radical left gives the Republicans an enemy to rally around and gives those same Democrats an excuse to punch left and move right. I remember a recent attack ad against Pelosi and all I could think was how can I vote for the candidate they’re describing because that sure isn’t the one we got.

partisan clowns slap the label "radical left" on the center-right neoliberal clowns of the democratic party.

most of the radical left, Democrat or otherwise, has been expressing contempt for the Russiagate narrative pretty much from day 1 -- and not because any/many of us have anything resembling love for Donald Trump.

...by stealing the words we use to describe ourselves. When we run out of words, we'll cease to exist.

First the came for liberal.
Then they took progressive to define happy incrementalists.
They took Left to describe unhappy nonconformists.
And they ran off with Far Left to describe Democratic Leaders.

They gave middle class to the poor,
And working class to the chronically unemployed.
They gave job creators to the automators and outsourcers.
The innovators are now the government contractors and monopolies.

partisan clowns slap the label "radical left" on the center-right neoliberal clowns of the democratic party.

most of the radical left, Democrat or otherwise, has been expressing contempt for the Russiagate narrative pretty much from day 1 -- and not because any/many of us have anything resembling love for Donald Trump.

up

10 users have voted.

—

The purpose of a writer is to keep civilization from destroying itself.
– Albert Camus

...by stealing the words we use to describe ourselves. When we run out of words, we'll cease to exist.

First the came for liberal.
Then they took progressive to define happy incrementalists.
They took Left to describe unhappy nonconformists.
And they ran off with Far Left to describe Democratic Leaders.

They gave middle class to the poor,
And working class to the chronically unemployed.
They gave job creators to the automators and outsourcers.
The innovators are now the government contractors and monopolies.

up

7 users have voted.

—

The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.

to see what Dems will do, now that the Mueller Report has been released.

I believe that Pelosi will lose this fight, and that the Party will go down the rabbit hole of impeachment. If they do, my 'guess' is that the Dem Party will implode before the 2020 election. Which, frankly, gives me no heartburn, since, maybea true lefty/radical Party would emerge from the ashes!

Seriously, watching with bated breath to see if there will be an "investigation, of the investigators."

The purpose of a writer is to keep civilization from destroying itself.
– Albert Camus

It's more than obvious that Barr whitewashed the Mueller report and he is covering up for Trump. Oh I wish that I was kidding, but here's a few tidbits from the insane asylum:

Now, just more than two months later, the Mueller investigation has been shut down, and Robert Mueller himself is nowhere to be seen

Attorney General William Barr lied to the American people about Robert Mueller's reasoning for not making a criminal finding of obstruction of justice against Donald Trump

However, Mueller also concluded he couldn't clear Trump of obstructing justice based on the evidence they uncovered.

"If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state," Mueller wrote. "Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

EH? He either obstructed justice or he did not. If you can't say that he did then I would think that means he did not. Isn't this an either or question? I am either guilty or not guilty. Seems like we are having shades of Fitzmas here. Too much sand kicked on home plate to see what happened.

In case people have forgotten, after Starr released his pornographic report on Clinton a law was passed that made it impossible for the full report on presidents to be released to the public. Barr with Mueller's help has been redacting what they had to. Oh NOES!!! Cosnpiracy!!

You'd think a member of congress would know that.

Every member of Congress needs to see the whole, unredacted report along with all underlying materials. And the materials must be provided to Congress so that members and staff can review them and provide a check on the abuse of the redaction process.

There is so much more of this type of nonsense that I could go on all week filling this box, but the sun is finally out and the dawgs want to walk finally this week and I need to mow the lawn.
But sadly this saga is a long way from over. And as long as so many people believe that Russia put Trump's buttocks in office this distraction is going to continue. Pluto you did a great job showing how this was totally made up from the gitgo as well as everyone here that have written numerous essays debunking every single point of this as new info came out.

Tah

up

14 users have voted.

—

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

But sadly this saga is a long way from over. And as long as so many people believe that Russia put Trump's buttocks in office this distraction is going to continue.

I think it may be a good thing. If Dems actually bring impeachment charges, I believe it will be viewed as overreach, and 'sour grapes' by the majority of the populace, and, just maybe a true radical lefty Party will rise out of the ash heap, in place of the corporatist Dem Party.

At any rate, I figure that Graham will be pressured by the RINOs to not investigate the Deep State actors--the Intel Community/FSC/BO/DNC, etc.--who are most responsible for instigating this fiasco. IOW, I'm 'guessing' that the purple state Repubs will tell him and Gowdy to 'move on.'

Time will tell.

[Edited: Deleted redundant phrase - "it might be a good thing".]

Mollie

I think dogs are the most amazing creatures; they give unconditional love. For me they are the role model for being alive.~~Gilda Radner, Comedienne

It's more than obvious that Barr whitewashed the Mueller report and he is covering up for Trump. Oh I wish that I was kidding, but here's a few tidbits from the insane asylum:

Now, just more than two months later, the Mueller investigation has been shut down, and Robert Mueller himself is nowhere to be seen

Attorney General William Barr lied to the American people about Robert Mueller's reasoning for not making a criminal finding of obstruction of justice against Donald Trump

However, Mueller also concluded he couldn't clear Trump of obstructing justice based on the evidence they uncovered.

"If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state," Mueller wrote. "Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

EH? He either obstructed justice or he did not. If you can't say that he did then I would think that means he did not. Isn't this an either or question? I am either guilty or not guilty. Seems like we are having shades of Fitzmas here. Too much sand kicked on home plate to see what happened.

In case people have forgotten, after Starr released his pornographic report on Clinton a law was passed that made it impossible for the full report on presidents to be released to the public. Barr with Mueller's help has been redacting what they had to. Oh NOES!!! Cosnpiracy!!

You'd think a member of congress would know that.

Every member of Congress needs to see the whole, unredacted report along with all underlying materials. And the materials must be provided to Congress so that members and staff can review them and provide a check on the abuse of the redaction process.

There is so much more of this type of nonsense that I could go on all week filling this box, but the sun is finally out and the dawgs want to walk finally this week and I need to mow the lawn.
But sadly this saga is a long way from over. And as long as so many people believe that Russia put Trump's buttocks in office this distraction is going to continue. Pluto you did a great job showing how this was totally made up from the gitgo as well as everyone here that have written numerous essays debunking every single point of this as new info came out.

...it's up to the DOJ to launch an investigation into the perpetrators of the Russia Hoax.

It doesn't matter if Congress decides not to do so. Members of Congress have nothing to gain from an investigation like this. Many of them will come out of it looking like fools or collaborators. It's not really a partisan issue. This unprecedented attack was on the nation and the will of the People.

But sadly this saga is a long way from over. And as long as so many people believe that Russia put Trump's buttocks in office this distraction is going to continue.

I think it may be a good thing. If Dems actually bring impeachment charges, I believe it will be viewed as overreach, and 'sour grapes' by the majority of the populace, and, just maybe a true radical lefty Party will rise out of the ash heap, in place of the corporatist Dem Party.

At any rate, I figure that Graham will be pressured by the RINOs to not investigate the Deep State actors--the Intel Community/FSC/BO/DNC, etc.--who are most responsible for instigating this fiasco. IOW, I'm 'guessing' that the purple state Repubs will tell him and Gowdy to 'move on.'

Time will tell.

[Edited: Deleted redundant phrase - "it might be a good thing".]

Mollie

I think dogs are the most amazing creatures; they give unconditional love. For me they are the role model for being alive.~~Gilda Radner, Comedienne

up

9 users have voted.

—

The purpose of a writer is to keep civilization from destroying itself.
– Albert Camus

that he'll review info about some of the FBI methods surrounding surveillance of DT, etc.

However, Lindsey Graham declared a couple weeks ago that he would also lead an investigation into the methods that the Intel Community employed initially, when the entire idea of conducting surveillance of the Trump campaign, first arose.

I think it's within his purview as the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He's also going to look into the validity of having had a FISA warrant issued based upon the so-called Steele Dossier.

Frankly, I don't mind if he (Graham) does. He, and other Repubs have made accusations for quite some time, that the FISA warrants weren't issued based on factual evidence (or, that the presiding Judge didn't know that some of the evidence was paid for by the Clinton campaign)--so, they should have to "put up, or, shut up." (IMO)

Hey, good to see you.

Mollie

I think dogs are the most amazing creatures; they give unconditional love. For me they are the role model for being alive.~~Gilda Radner, Comedienne

...it's up to the DOJ to launch an investigation into the perpetrators of the Russia Hoax.

It doesn't matter if Congress decides not to do so. Members of Congress have nothing to gain from an investigation like this. Many of them will come out of it looking like fools or collaborators. It's not really a partisan issue. This unprecedented attack was on the nation and the will of the People.

@Unabashed Liberal
made several (I think about 8) criminal referrals to the DOJ. He says it is up to DOJ to work on these, and he refused yesterday (or the day before) to disclose the people to the Fox interviewer (which I think is the right thing to do - not disclose until an appropriate time, maybe after a grand jury indictment??).

that he'll review info about some of the FBI methods surrounding surveillance of DT, etc.

However, Lindsey Graham declared a couple weeks ago that he would also lead an investigation into the methods that the Intel Community employed initially, when the entire idea of conducting surveillance of the Trump campaign, first arose.

I think it's within his purview as the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He's also going to look into the validity of having had a FISA warrant issued based upon the so-called Steele Dossier.

Frankly, I don't mind if he (Graham) does. He, and other Repubs have made accusations for quite some time, that the FISA warrants weren't issued based on factual evidence (or, that the presiding Judge didn't know that some of the evidence was paid for by the Clinton campaign)--so, they should have to "put up, or, shut up." (IMO)

Hey, good to see you.

Mollie

I think dogs are the most amazing creatures; they give unconditional love. For me they are the role model for being alive.~~Gilda Radner, Comedienne

Really, something like this needs an entire Commission. From what I know about it, it's very unclean and reaches deep into the US political system, including judicial. Congress, for the most part, seems to be utterly clueless. They're like temps. How is that possible? I guess that's why they call it Deep State.

that he'll review info about some of the FBI methods surrounding surveillance of DT, etc.

However, Lindsey Graham declared a couple weeks ago that he would also lead an investigation into the methods that the Intel Community employed initially, when the entire idea of conducting surveillance of the Trump campaign, first arose.

I think it's within his purview as the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He's also going to look into the validity of having had a FISA warrant issued based upon the so-called Steele Dossier.

Frankly, I don't mind if he (Graham) does. He, and other Repubs have made accusations for quite some time, that the FISA warrants weren't issued based on factual evidence (or, that the presiding Judge didn't know that some of the evidence was paid for by the Clinton campaign)--so, they should have to "put up, or, shut up." (IMO)

Hey, good to see you.

Mollie

I think dogs are the most amazing creatures; they give unconditional love. For me they are the role model for being alive.~~Gilda Radner, Comedienne

up

9 users have voted.

—

The purpose of a writer is to keep civilization from destroying itself.
– Albert Camus

He's busy doing everything that the master class has wanted done for a very long time. People say that McConnell won't do anything to upset Trump's base, but he's actually more interested in not upsetting Trump's donors and the people who are really pulling his strings.
This saga is great for distracting people from the real issues affecting the country. One look at the wreckage list on ToP for the last two years shows that. No one covers any of the more serious problems facing us because their noses are sniffing out everything regarding Russia, Trump's actions and other silly stuff.

Nancy knows that there are real issues that she could use to try to impeach him, but since congress is just as guilty she won't. The emoluments clause is out now too since the DOJ has said that it's okay for people involved government as long as it just helps their personal businesses.

But sadly this saga is a long way from over. And as long as so many people believe that Russia put Trump's buttocks in office this distraction is going to continue.

I think it may be a good thing. If Dems actually bring impeachment charges, I believe it will be viewed as overreach, and 'sour grapes' by the majority of the populace, and, just maybe a true radical lefty Party will rise out of the ash heap, in place of the corporatist Dem Party.

At any rate, I figure that Graham will be pressured by the RINOs to not investigate the Deep State actors--the Intel Community/FSC/BO/DNC, etc.--who are most responsible for instigating this fiasco. IOW, I'm 'guessing' that the purple state Repubs will tell him and Gowdy to 'move on.'

Time will tell.

[Edited: Deleted redundant phrase - "it might be a good thing".]

Mollie

I think dogs are the most amazing creatures; they give unconditional love. For me they are the role model for being alive.~~Gilda Radner, Comedienne

up

10 users have voted.

—

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

Secondly, if Dems weren't worried, they wouldn't be running 2-3 candidates representing almost every special interest group that comprises the Party. It's clear that most of the candidates "don't have a snowball's chance in h*ll" to win--so, it must indicate a high degree of concern and/or desperation within the Dem Party Caucus/Leadership.

To top it off, it's being done in spite of the Dems knowing that the MSM is in their hip pocket--practically, an extension of their Party.

Further, it may also depend upon what Graham does. I could be wrong, but, from watching the concern that has started setting in (with the MSM) now that Graham's declared he'll start his investigation into the FISA warrants, etc., I'm wondering if Dems might already be backed into a corner, and have to do it, in hopes that it will stall, or stop, Repubs' investigatory efforts.

Think about it--if the Repubs are correct (and I don't know if they are) that there were major violations regarding the FISA warrants, etc., and they can prove it--some major players may be taken down, including Dems.

(Remember, there's a claim that 'O' ordered the counter-intel investigation of DT and his campaign, in the first place--with the help of Susan Rice, and others. Dunno if that's true, BTW, since I don't follow this topic super closely.)

Anyhoo, I definitely agree that it would be political suicide for ol' Nancy to give in to the more ardent activists in the Party Base, who are clamoring for DT's head on a platter. But, she's proven that she'll do about anything she has to, in order to protect, or maintain, her 'power.'

Frankly, it wouldn't bother me if she does go along with impeachment proceedings. The backlash would be likely be substantial, and, just maybe, we'd be rid of corporatist Dems--for good!

Hey, one can always hope . . .

Have a good one!

Mollie

I think dogs are the most amazing creatures; they give unconditional love. For me they are the role model for being alive.~~Gilda Radner, Comedienne

He's busy doing everything that the master class has wanted done for a very long time. People say that McConnell won't do anything to upset Trump's base, but he's actually more interested in not upsetting Trump's donors and the people who are really pulling his strings.
This saga is great for distracting people from the real issues affecting the country. One look at the wreckage list on ToP for the last two years shows that. No one covers any of the more serious problems facing us because their noses are sniffing out everything regarding Russia, Trump's actions and other silly stuff.

Nancy knows that there are real issues that she could use to try to impeach him, but since congress is just as guilty she won't. The emoluments clause is out now too since the DOJ has said that it's okay for people involved government as long as it just helps their personal businesses.

@Unabashed Liberal@Unabashed Liberal
just saw one of the headlines on my homepage this morning. Something about AOC continuing to push for impeachment. I wonder how her “progressive” friend Nancy feels about that? Of course I also wonder how a first term “outsider” congresswoman gets so much front page press. Wonders never cease, do they?

Secondly, if Dems weren't worried, they wouldn't be running 2-3 candidates representing almost every special interest group that comprises the Party. It's clear that most of the candidates "don't have a snowball's chance in h*ll" to win--so, it must indicate a high degree of concern and/or desperation within the Dem Party Caucus/Leadership.

To top it off, it's being done in spite of the Dems knowing that the MSM is in their hip pocket--practically, an extension of their Party.

Further, it may also depend upon what Graham does. I could be wrong, but, from watching the concern that has started setting in (with the MSM) now that Graham's declared he'll start his investigation into the FISA warrants, etc., I'm wondering if Dems might already be backed into a corner, and have to do it, in hopes that it will stall, or stop, Repubs' investigatory efforts.

Think about it--if the Repubs are correct (and I don't know if they are) that there were major violations regarding the FISA warrants, etc., and they can prove it--some major players may be taken down, including Dems.

(Remember, there's a claim that 'O' ordered the counter-intel investigation of DT and his campaign, in the first place--with the help of Susan Rice, and others. Dunno if that's true, BTW, since I don't follow this topic super closely.)

Anyhoo, I definitely agree that it would be political suicide for ol' Nancy to give in to the more ardent activists in the Party Base, who are clamoring for DT's head on a platter. But, she's proven that she'll do about anything she has to, in order to protect, or maintain, her 'power.'

Frankly, it wouldn't bother me if she does go along with impeachment proceedings. The backlash would be likely be substantial, and, just maybe, we'd be rid of corporatist Dems--for good!

Hey, one can always hope . . .

Have a good one!

Mollie

I think dogs are the most amazing creatures; they give unconditional love. For me they are the role model for being alive.~~Gilda Radner, Comedienne

But sadly this saga is a long way from over. And as long as so many people believe that Russia put Trump's buttocks in office this distraction is going to continue.

I think it may be a good thing. If Dems actually bring impeachment charges, I believe it will be viewed as overreach, and 'sour grapes' by the majority of the populace, and, just maybe a true radical lefty Party will rise out of the ash heap, in place of the corporatist Dem Party.

At any rate, I figure that Graham will be pressured by the RINOs to not investigate the Deep State actors--the Intel Community/FSC/BO/DNC, etc.--who are most responsible for instigating this fiasco. IOW, I'm 'guessing' that the purple state Repubs will tell him and Gowdy to 'move on.'

Time will tell.

[Edited: Deleted redundant phrase - "it might be a good thing".]

Mollie

I think dogs are the most amazing creatures; they give unconditional love. For me they are the role model for being alive.~~Gilda Radner, Comedienne

...@snoopydawg
, as far as I'm concerned. It's like looking at entrails to read the future.

EH? He either obstructed justice or he did not. If you can't say that he did then I would think that means he did not. Isn't this an either or question? I am either guilty or not guilty. Seems like we are having shades of Fitzmas here. Too much sand kicked on home plate to see what happened.

Is this your comment, or an import? I do know people are tripping over obstruction. But the process is clear. Any new evidence can be presented to the Attorney General to see if it comes up to the standard of obstruction. As long as Barr is AG, the evidence in Mueller's report is a no go.

You did a lot of the heavy lifting around here, so thanks, Dawg.

PS: I don't think Pelosi will allow impeachment to even be discussed.

It's more than obvious that Barr whitewashed the Mueller report and he is covering up for Trump. Oh I wish that I was kidding, but here's a few tidbits from the insane asylum:

Now, just more than two months later, the Mueller investigation has been shut down, and Robert Mueller himself is nowhere to be seen

Attorney General William Barr lied to the American people about Robert Mueller's reasoning for not making a criminal finding of obstruction of justice against Donald Trump

However, Mueller also concluded he couldn't clear Trump of obstructing justice based on the evidence they uncovered.

"If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state," Mueller wrote. "Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

EH? He either obstructed justice or he did not. If you can't say that he did then I would think that means he did not. Isn't this an either or question? I am either guilty or not guilty. Seems like we are having shades of Fitzmas here. Too much sand kicked on home plate to see what happened.

In case people have forgotten, after Starr released his pornographic report on Clinton a law was passed that made it impossible for the full report on presidents to be released to the public. Barr with Mueller's help has been redacting what they had to. Oh NOES!!! Cosnpiracy!!

You'd think a member of congress would know that.

Every member of Congress needs to see the whole, unredacted report along with all underlying materials. And the materials must be provided to Congress so that members and staff can review them and provide a check on the abuse of the redaction process.

There is so much more of this type of nonsense that I could go on all week filling this box, but the sun is finally out and the dawgs want to walk finally this week and I need to mow the lawn.
But sadly this saga is a long way from over. And as long as so many people believe that Russia put Trump's buttocks in office this distraction is going to continue. Pluto you did a great job showing how this was totally made up from the gitgo as well as everyone here that have written numerous essays debunking every single point of this as new info came out.

Tah

up

9 users have voted.

—

The purpose of a writer is to keep civilization from destroying itself.
– Albert Camus

Essentially, Mueller is trying to move the goal posts on the "innocent until proven guilty" concept, a rather important concept until the dems and femi-nazis decided to do away it during the SC court hearings and me-too stories. (Yeah, I used the word femi-nazis, because that is exactly what they are - how dare they mess with "innocent until proven guilty").

As Giuliani says, he has never heard of the legal standard that Mueller used in his report.

...#16, as far as I'm concerned. It's like looking at entrails to read the future.

EH? He either obstructed justice or he did not. If you can't say that he did then I would think that means he did not. Isn't this an either or question? I am either guilty or not guilty. Seems like we are having shades of Fitzmas here. Too much sand kicked on home plate to see what happened.

Is this your comment, or an import? I do know people are tripping over obstruction. But the process is clear. Any new evidence can be presented to the Attorney General to see if it comes up to the standard of obstruction. As long as Barr is AG, the evidence in Mueller's report is a no go.

This is my comment and I'm relying on an article I read that said either a crime has been committed or it hasn't. I'm paraphrasing from memory, but Mueller had to decide if one was committed. I don't think he could say one was because we know how many times the FBI tried to entrap him.

There wouldn't have been a Trump tower meeting if Obama's state department hadn't fixed the Russian lawyer's passport and if Fusion GPS hadn't set it up.

Lots of people here have done a great job of writing essays about the various parts of this saga. I suggested once posting an essay with all the links, but realized I don't have the time or energy to do it because there has been so many.

People can look at yours, mine and gulfgal's essays in the archives to see how well we've documented this. I'm sure I'm leaving some names off the list and I'm sorry. Peak up if you remember who else did.

I'm still pleased about how people here never drank the Russian Koop aid!

...#16, as far as I'm concerned. It's like looking at entrails to read the future.

EH? He either obstructed justice or he did not. If you can't say that he did then I would think that means he did not. Isn't this an either or question? I am either guilty or not guilty. Seems like we are having shades of Fitzmas here. Too much sand kicked on home plate to see what happened.

Is this your comment, or an import? I do know people are tripping over obstruction. But the process is clear. Any new evidence can be presented to the Attorney General to see if it comes up to the standard of obstruction. As long as Barr is AG, the evidence in Mueller's report is a no go.

You did a lot of the heavy lifting around here, so thanks, Dawg.

PS: I don't think Pelosi will allow impeachment to even be discussed.

up

10 users have voted.

—

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

She said something about what she read in the Mueller report yesterday and I wanted to ask how she read it since it hasn't been released yet? But I like watching what she writes so I don't reply often because she would block me.

Hey, I'm surprised that Armando hadn't yet. I've been a little stinker in some of my replies to him. I only said one thing to another person from DK and got blocked. I was sad....

pluto. because like the bible, marcy wheeler tells me so. what are you, some kinda commie or revisionist or something?

(srsly, though; well done, upside-down pluto amigo.)

up

8 users have voted.

—

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

She said something about what she read in the Mueller report yesterday and I wanted to ask how she read it since it hasn't been released yet? But I like watching what she writes so I don't reply often because she would block me.

Hey, I'm surprised that Armando hadn't yet. I've been a little stinker in some of my replies to him. I only said one thing to another person from DK and got blocked. I was sad....

The investigation identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign. Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and the Campaign expected it would benefit from information stolen and released by the Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that member of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

We can thank Comey and Warner for killing the deal with Assange that might have debunked the fact that Russia hacked the DNC computers and gave them to Wikileaks. Another thing that people should be asking if Mueller believes that Russia hacked them is where is the proof and if he thinks they gave it to Wikileaks then why didn't Mueller interview Assange or anyone else from Wikileaks? Hmmm? Inquiring minds want to know why he did a half assed investigation. Or why no one has asked Comey why the FBI did not look at the computers if they are going to make a definitive statement that Russia did the deed?

up

14 users have voted.

—

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

If so, it doesn't seem like much of a deal. Only some discussion about possibly starting talks. And I don't see anything in there where there's any suggestion that Assange will reveal his sources much less anything amounting to some kind of plea deal.

So what is really known?

A few more:

The investigation identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign. Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and the Campaign expected it would benefit from information stolen and released by the Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that member of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

We can thank Comey and Warner for killing the deal with Assange that might have debunked the fact that Russia hacked the DNC computers and gave them to Wikileaks. Another thing that people should be asking if Mueller believes that Russia hacked them is where is the proof and if he thinks they gave it to Wikileaks then why didn't Mueller interview Assange or anyone else from Wikileaks? Hmmm? Inquiring minds want to know why he did a half assed investigation. Or why no one has asked Comey why the FBI did not look at the computers if they are going to make a definitive statement that Russia did the deed?

His mistake was getting involved with the Steele dossier, and then using it to get a FISA warrant.

A few more:

The investigation identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign. Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and the Campaign expected it would benefit from information stolen and released by the Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that member of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

We can thank Comey and Warner for killing the deal with Assange that might have debunked the fact that Russia hacked the DNC computers and gave them to Wikileaks. Another thing that people should be asking if Mueller believes that Russia hacked them is where is the proof and if he thinks they gave it to Wikileaks then why didn't Mueller interview Assange or anyone else from Wikileaks? Hmmm? Inquiring minds want to know why he did a half assed investigation. Or why no one has asked Comey why the FBI did not look at the computers if they are going to make a definitive statement that Russia did the deed?

up

7 users have voted.

—

The purpose of a writer is to keep civilization from destroying itself.
– Albert Camus

From what I've read, he was interviewed by Trump for the top FBI position. Then he shortly thereafter accepted the position of special counsel. So, the writer concluded that this was a conflict of interest.

They have a mix of reporters/commenters (but mostly conservative) who are pro and anti Trump.

It was Fox news reporters, John Solomon, Sara Carter, and Kathleen Herridge who did the heavy lifting and research in the beginning that ultimately led commenters like Hannity, Carlson, and Ingraham to conclude that the Mueller thing was a hoax.

But Judge Nap is mostly pro-hoax and Chris Wallace is kind of a mixed bag.

A few more:

The investigation identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign. Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and the Campaign expected it would benefit from information stolen and released by the Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that member of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

We can thank Comey and Warner for killing the deal with Assange that might have debunked the fact that Russia hacked the DNC computers and gave them to Wikileaks. Another thing that people should be asking if Mueller believes that Russia hacked them is where is the proof and if he thinks they gave it to Wikileaks then why didn't Mueller interview Assange or anyone else from Wikileaks? Hmmm? Inquiring minds want to know why he did a half assed investigation. Or why no one has asked Comey why the FBI did not look at the computers if they are going to make a definitive statement that Russia did the deed?

It gives people the impression that yes indeed Russia interfered with the election and that is what people are going to continue to believe. So even though Trump didn't collude with Vlad people still believe the first part. If Fox News posts something like that it's not without the top dudes approving it.

They have a mix of reporters/commenters (but mostly conservative) who are pro and anti Trump.

It was Fox news reporters, John Solomon, Sara Carter, and Kathleen Herridge who did the heavy lifting and research in the beginning that ultimately led commenters like Hannity, Carlson, and Ingraham to conclude that the Mueller thing was a hoax.

But Judge Nap is mostly pro-hoax and Chris Wallace is kind of a mixed bag.

up

7 users have voted.

—

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

@snoopydawg
top dudes do and how much they intervene with programming.

I can say that I go to the Fox news website daily - usually several times, and what you presented is not representative of the entirety.

In fact, I've been off and on the website quite a bit today, and I have not seen what you posted. I'm not saying it is not there, it's just not what I've seen when I pull up the website. But I can see links to articles that are critical of Trump, so maybe it is now buried there.

It gives people the impression that yes indeed Russia interfered with the election and that is what people are going to continue to believe. So even though Trump didn't collude with Vlad people still believe the first part. If Fox News posts something like that it's not without the top dudes approving it.

It gives people the impression that yes indeed Russia interfered with the election and that is what people are going to continue to believe. So even though Trump didn't collude with Vlad people still believe the first part. If Fox News posts something like that it's not without the top dudes approving it.

from wsws this morning: ‘US preparing more charges against Julian Assange’

“On Wednesday, CNN reported US federal prosecutors confirmed there is an “ongoing criminal investigation” of Julian Assange, the 47-year-old founder of WikiLeaks. Prosecutors also indicated “affiliates” of Assange are under investigation, this according to another newly unsealed document. According to the CNN report, at least one document related to this investigation has been withheld from the public due to “ongoing activity.”
The revelation, CNN reported, “confirms CNN and other news outlets’ reporting in recent days that WikiLeaks is connected to at least one probe that could result in more criminal charges.”

“But since Assange has been imprisoned in the maximum-security Belmarsh prison, public comments made by leading Democrats and US media officials indicate that charge was not the primary aim of the US investigation.

Democratic Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer tweeted, “Now that Julian Assange has been arrested, I hope he will soon be held to account for his meddling in our elections on behalf of Putin and the Russian government.” Democratic chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Eliot Engel tweeted that Assange “time after time compromised the national security of the United States and our allies by publicly releasing classified government documents and confidential materials related to our 2016 presidential election.”

from ccn on april 17, 2019 ‘Omissions in Assange case and ongoing investigations signal broader charges to come’

"“Washington(CNN) Julian Assange faced a single criminal charge when he was pulled from the Ecuadorian embassy in London last week -- but, according to a CNN review of court records [whatever that means], prosecutors have already given a roadmap about how they may be continuing to investigate WikiLeaks and suggested that more charges are to come.”

“Three ongoing criminal proceedings suggest that the Justice Department continues to target Assange. Two of these are grand jury efforts to obtain testimony from witnesses -- Manning, the Army intelligence agent-turned-leaker who's central to his case, and, separately, former Roger Stone associate Andrew Miller -- who have information about Assange and Wikileaks.

The Justice Department's rules governing grand juries say they can't keep investigating after an indictment is filed, unless they are pursuing additional charges. So far, prosecutors have been coy about why they want Assange and Miller to testify, though the two have in common that they each have info about Assange and Wikileaks.

Assange's indictment was filed more than a year ago, yet a grand jury known to be investigating WikiLeaks continues to sit in the Eastern District of Virginia.”

“On Monday, a federal judge in New York City also noted how a criminal investigation related to yet another alleged WikiLeaks leaker is ongoing.

The case, against former CIA software engineer Joshua Schulte, had originally begun as a child pornography case in August 2017 -- the type that's routinely prosecuted by federal authorities.

But in June 2018, prosecutors added to the charges against Schulte, alleging he illegally gathered classified information from the CIA on his computers with the intent to harm the US. He allegedly sent the info to WikiLeaks -- called "Organization-1" in the court record, which posted the documents. It's known as the "Vault 7" leak.”

...but the usual dumb attempts at entrapment. I know Stone's story, which is utterly banal. He has no connection to Wikileaks. Andrew Miller is just another political dilettante. This doesn't mean that they cannot be completely destroyed via the abuse of government power. But that seems too low-life for Mueller to end his case with. He should dismiss all these charges and move on with what's left of his intellectual dignity.

The spooks are obviously doubling down again on their Russiabation fantasies. Maybe its a temper tantrum, or maybe they're trying to pound life back into their ridiculously-easy-to-debunk narrative. They will keep doing that until they are dead, as if someone cared about their creepy legacy. They are not even footnotes to history. They came to earth, produced a lot of methane, and soon they'll be gone, having accomplished nothing worth remembering.

I'm not going to consider Assange in this context. I need to protect myself from trauma. It's a full time job, pretty much.

this will tie into the mueller investigation eventually, i promise.

from wsws this morning: ‘US preparing more charges against Julian Assange’

“On Wednesday, CNN reported US federal prosecutors confirmed there is an “ongoing criminal investigation” of Julian Assange, the 47-year-old founder of WikiLeaks. Prosecutors also indicated “affiliates” of Assange are under investigation, this according to another newly unsealed document. According to the CNN report, at least one document related to this investigation has been withheld from the public due to “ongoing activity.”
The revelation, CNN reported, “confirms CNN and other news outlets’ reporting in recent days that WikiLeaks is connected to at least one probe that could result in more criminal charges.”

“But since Assange has been imprisoned in the maximum-security Belmarsh prison, public comments made by leading Democrats and US media officials indicate that charge was not the primary aim of the US investigation.

Democratic Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer tweeted, “Now that Julian Assange has been arrested, I hope he will soon be held to account for his meddling in our elections on behalf of Putin and the Russian government.” Democratic chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Eliot Engel tweeted that Assange “time after time compromised the national security of the United States and our allies by publicly releasing classified government documents and confidential materials related to our 2016 presidential election.”

from ccn on april 17, 2019 ‘Omissions in Assange case and ongoing investigations signal broader charges to come’

"“Washington(CNN) Julian Assange faced a single criminal charge when he was pulled from the Ecuadorian embassy in London last week -- but, according to a CNN review of court records [whatever that means], prosecutors have already given a roadmap about how they may be continuing to investigate WikiLeaks and suggested that more charges are to come.”

“Three ongoing criminal proceedings suggest that the Justice Department continues to target Assange. Two of these are grand jury efforts to obtain testimony from witnesses -- Manning, the Army intelligence agent-turned-leaker who's central to his case, and, separately, former Roger Stone associate Andrew Miller -- who have information about Assange and Wikileaks.

The Justice Department's rules governing grand juries say they can't keep investigating after an indictment is filed, unless they are pursuing additional charges. So far, prosecutors have been coy about why they want Assange and Miller to testify, though the two have in common that they each have info about Assange and Wikileaks.

Assange's indictment was filed more than a year ago, yet a grand jury known to be investigating WikiLeaks continues to sit in the Eastern District of Virginia.”

“On Monday, a federal judge in New York City also noted how a criminal investigation related to yet another alleged WikiLeaks leaker is ongoing.

The case, against former CIA software engineer Joshua Schulte, had originally begun as a child pornography case in August 2017 -- the type that's routinely prosecuted by federal authorities.

But in June 2018, prosecutors added to the charges against Schulte, alleging he illegally gathered classified information from the CIA on his computers with the intent to harm the US. He allegedly sent the info to WikiLeaks -- called "Organization-1" in the court record, which posted the documents. It's known as the "Vault 7" leak.”

i'd had to bingle andrew miller, but you'll know who he is.

up

5 users have voted.

—

The purpose of a writer is to keep civilization from destroying itself.
– Albert Camus

...but the usual dumb attempts at entrapment. I know Stone's story, which is utterly banal. He has no connection to Wikileaks. Andrew Miller is just another political dilettante. This doesn't mean that they cannot be completely destroyed via the abuse of government power. But that seems too low-life for Mueller to end his case with. He should dismiss all these charges and move on with what's left of his intellectual dignity.

The spooks are obviously doubling down again on their Russiabation fantasies. Maybe its a temper tantrum, or maybe they're trying to pound life back into their ridiculously-easy-to-debunk narrative. They will keep doing that until they are dead, as if someone cared about their creepy legacy. They are not even footnotes to history. They came to earth, produced a lot of methane, and soon they'll be gone, having accomplished nothing worth remembering.

I'm not going to consider Assange in this context. I need to protect myself from trauma. It's a full time job, pretty much.